See if this makes any sense. If you take the total of home runs he hit as an everyday player which I think is 665 and divide that by his 16 everyday player years, you average 41.5 home runs. Now times that by 6 pitching years and you get 249 home run instead of the 49 actual homers he hit. Add 665 and 249 and we get 914 career home runs.
If we believe that my calculations are at least 90 to 95 percent correct, the answer would be COMPLETELY OUT OF REACH!! lol
I know, I have to find another hobby!!!
2007-05-27 15:05:43
·
answer #1
·
answered by Yankee Dude 6
·
5⤊
0⤋
The game still used the "dead ball" through 1919, and Ruth wasn't a pitcher for THAT long. He probably would have finished between 775-800 but higher than that would have been unlikely.
By a similar token, we can speculate where Bonds would be today if he hadn't missed most of 2005 with knee issues. Or give back Mays the 1952-53 time he missed in military service. Or move Aaron's Braves to Atlanta directly from Boston, putting him in a great hitting park his entire career and circumventing Selig ever getting involved in the game (bwa ha ha).
Ruth hit 714, a huge total, one that stood alone for a long time and has fallen merely to third highest today. He hasn't faded into history.
2007-05-27 15:27:04
·
answer #2
·
answered by Chipmaker Authentic 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Great question. With all respect to Hank Aarron (great player) the Babe would still have the record. However I don't think it would be out of reach. There will be someone who would eventually catch whatever that number would have been. Look at the numbers that Ryan Howard put up at a young age last year. Or what Prince Fielder is doing so far this year. I don't think either has reached the age of 25 yet. Players are playing longer and with more productivity. Someone would catch that number.
2007-05-28 09:04:30
·
answer #3
·
answered by stoutt13 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Back in the day, there was no designated hitter, nor a 5-man rotation for the pitchers. He most likely played as many games as pitcher and outfielder combined as any player around today.
In all honesty, I don't think you'll ever get a right answer on this one- it's just a matter of opinion.
2007-05-27 14:44:53
·
answer #4
·
answered by phl713 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
What really would've changed things is the amount of games they played in Babe Ruth's time. Back then they played 151, and now they play 162. So over the course of Babe Ruth's 22 year career he would've have played 242 more games, which is like a whole season and a half. Those extra games could've given him 35-55 more HR's.
2007-05-27 14:54:40
·
answer #5
·
answered by R.I.P. Kirby Puckett 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
I would say yess, whele no he did no have a 5 man rotation there was a 3 man rotation which means when he was pitching he only hit every three days, also pitching is the most exhausting position on the field physically, mentally, and emotionally therefore in my opinion had he come up as an outfielder I think Bonds is still chasing him
2007-05-27 14:56:23
·
answer #6
·
answered by sigeptxbeta02 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
IF im correct he still alot of homeruns as a pitcher/outfielder. i do believe he would have hit more cause he would have played everyday . Lets not forget the Babe did party long and hard back in those days. he would have still burned out early . the babes health slowed him down considerably .
2007-05-27 14:59:42
·
answer #7
·
answered by primet21 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Babe didn't take care of himself and often got suspended for long periods at a time.
Had he kept himself up and not been such a wild man the record would have been a little tougher to reach but not way out of hand.
2007-05-27 14:45:37
·
answer #8
·
answered by Cool Shoes 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
really good question. to be hinest with you, although it is a good point, i definitely just see current hitters, like "Barroid" Bonds, as welll as the distributors, finding new and differetn performance enhancing drugs that would further aid a hitter with his power, and thus no hr record from earlier this cnetury would be out of reach
2007-05-27 14:40:54
·
answer #9
·
answered by Jason G 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Maybe. I think he might have gotten the record but not put it to far out of reach.
2007-05-27 14:55:19
·
answer #10
·
answered by sportsfreak330 2
·
1⤊
0⤋